What mileage could you expect from a 3.2 S

[BoxsterSPete]

Hi

A friend is considering buying a 3.2 S (2005) with 135k miles that has a FSH. What mileage do people think the engine and manual  transmission will be good for before any major works will be required?
TIA. Pete

[headless]

How long is a piece of string!!!!

[Menoporsche]

That's pretty much the same engine as in the 2001-2004 cars and some of them are hitting 150k.  Some of the early cars are approaching 200k. I'm guessing the reason for no more is that 2-seater convertibles generally are not used so much, not a question of reliability. If this is a 2005 car, it hasn't been used for minicabbing so it's more likely a previous owner lived at one end of the country and had a partner at the other end.  Motorway miles - not a problem.  I don't think we hear much about engine internals and when we do it's because they're terminal not routine.

Main question for me would be suspension, wheel bearings etc.

[Michael J Hayes]

Forgetting the age, that’s a lot of miles on a any car, I’m looking for a low mileage one as it’s going to hold its value better 

there is a blue 2005 3.2 s on auto trader at the moment for under 13k with just 40k on the clock 

[Jon61]

4 minutes ago, Michael J Hayes said:

I’m looking for a low mileage one as it’s going to hold its value better 

That logic might apply if you don't put much mileage on it yourself, but if you pay a premium for it being low mileage, then it still has more value to lose. Conversely,  if you buy a bargain basement high-miler, then unless it gives up the ghost, it hasn't got much value still to lose. Total cost of ownership might be different if you end up having to replace a lot, but that can happen on any oldish car, not just a high mileage one. There are plenty of examples of people who've bought higher mileage cars, kept them for a year or so and then sold them for the same money that they paid for them. 

[Bike Loon]

46 minutes ago, Michael J Hayes said:

Forgetting the age, that’s a lot of miles on a any car, I’m looking for a low mileage one as it’s going to hold its value better 

there is a blue 2005 3.2 s on auto trader at the moment for under 13k with just 40k on the clock 

Low mileage garage queen ones can be more prone to problems than well used ones due to lack of use. Mine has 120,000 miles on it, full Porsche history and drives like new. Mileage on a 6 cylinder 3.4 litre engine is not a massive issue. Especially when Porsche "only" extract 295bhp from it, hardly working to capacity.

 

You pay your money you take your chance

[PaulQ]

The engine and gearbox will probably be fine for up to 200k, but it's everything else that will wear with age and miles.

Bear in mind that Boxsters are very sensitive to price vs mileage, so around 7K maybe less for a 135k mile 2005 S

[Nobbie]

1 hour ago, Michael J Hayes said:

Forgetting the age, that’s a lot of miles on a any car, I’m looking for a low mileage one as it’s going to hold its value better 

there is a blue 2005 3.2 s on auto trader at the moment for under 13k with just 40k on the clock 

If you look at it from a cost per mile driven, the high mileage car will always come out cheaper, but if you won't be doing any more miles per year than the car already has already done, then low mileage cars may make sense, especially if you will only keep it a short time as resale will be quicker. I'm at the other end of the scale and bought a car with 139k on it that has averaged a decent mileage each year and been regularly serviced so the engine has always run with decent oil. I've added 1/2 litre of oil in 6k miles and the engine runs beautifully and an oil test has revealed no obvious wear.

I think the takeaway from this is to buy a car that has been regularly serviced and looked after. If the car is a garage queen doing only 2K a year, then it should probably have had an annual oil change depending on how those miles were driven. If lots of small trips, the oil will deteriorate quickly, if it's just a single tour of the highlands each year then it would probably be fine for 10 years on the same oil.

I'd agree with Paul on the 200K figure, although 2nd gear on the 6 speed box does seem to wear out well before this. Assume the 2005 is still on the 5 speed box?

[Boxstercol]

Other thing to consider is whether low mileage cars actually are low mileage & not just been clocked.

Only way to have any degree of confidence in the stated mileage is by looking at the operating hours when it's plugged in.

There are plenty of reports of Porsches being clocked as the value increase can be quite large & they also wear the miles well.

[Michael J Hayes]

13 hours ago, Boxstercol said:

Other thing to consider is whether low mileage cars actually are low mileage & not just been clocked.

Only way to have any degree of confidence in the stated mileage is by looking at the operating hours when it's plugged in.

There are plenty of reports of Porsches being clocked as the value increase can be quite large & they also wear the miles well.

An easy way to check the mileage these days is to go on the mot history check site it’s tells of all the fails and advisory’s plus it says what mileage it has covered over the year 

[BoxsterSPete]

On 7/29/2018 at 11:26 AM, Jon61 said:

That logic might apply if you don't put much mileage on it yourself, but if you pay a premium for it being low mileage, then it still has more value to lose. Conversely,  if you buy a bargain basement high-miler, then unless it gives up the ghost, it hasn't got much value still to lose. Total cost of ownership might be different if you end up having to replace a lot, but that can happen on any oldish car, not just a high mileage one. There are plenty of examples of people who've bought higher mileage cars, kept them for a year or so and then sold them for the same money that they paid for them. 

Great post, thanks.

[BoxsterSPete]

Lots of great views points/posts.

Thanks guys ?

[Freeman]

On ‎7‎/‎29‎/‎2018 at 1:01 PM, Boxstercol said:

Other thing to consider is whether low mileage cars actually are low mileage & not just been clocked.

Only way to have any degree of confidence in the stated mileage is by looking at the operating hours when it's plugged in.

There are plenty of reports of Porsches being clocked as the value increase can be quite large & they also wear the miles well.

It is also possible to clock the recorded hours. There is a guy that advertise it.

As for the question.

I bought mine with 72k on it, now has just over 74k. Had to rebuild the suspension, rear brakes and the 6 pack. Drives great and provides the best ratio of green/mile.

[markSTI]

The general consensus among Porsche experts is the less it is used the more issues you'll have. I recently read an article from Autofarm who said if they had a choice between a higher mileage immaculate car with excellent provenance they would take it every time over a low mileage garage queen of the same age that never gets driven.  I was recently at centre of gravity having the chassis setup properly and Chris was saying that most of the cars they see with chassis issues are low mileage garage queens. He said they had recently setup a 986 Boxster S with 150k on the clock still on its original shocks, springs etc. They guy goes to them every year to have the rubbers etc greased and it still handles like it should.

[PaulQ]

4 hours ago, markSTI said:

 He said they had recently setup a 986 Boxster S with 150k on the clock still on its original shocks, springs etc. They guy goes to them every year to have the rubbers etc greased and it still handles like it should.

150k on original suspension and handles like it should? Think @edc might have something to say about that..... Lol. 

 

[Patt]

Id' say at 150k the chain carriers and tensioners will need/should be replaced.  Their tolerance can be checked with the correct computer to validate.

If clutch and flywheel are in good nick , the gearbox is virtually bulletproof as it was built for much more power, although cables will be worn.

Suspension will NOT be fresh at 100k, let alone 150k.

 

If car regularly used and well serviced it would still be better than a garage queen.

[edc]

Handles like it should is not the same as handles like new. I've been to CG a few times myself and had both my Boxsters on their damper rig. Both showed as perfectly ok for continued use. No leaks etc. That didn't stop me relaxing the suspension on both occasions. 

CG are good guys and they will give you what you want with critique and recommendations along the way. If you go in with a game plan to avoid any changes then they will work with that and as long as things work within an acceptable range they will do what is needed to hone the car for you. If you tell then I am aiming for X then they will consult with you to figure that out and build it up. Be under no illusions though that at 150k it handles like a new car. 

[mvw]

I have a 986s and it's coming up to 166k miles.  I had the suspension replaced at ~90k and it's holding up well, but that was "only" 3.5 years ago.  Main issues with mine, which I don't know are applicable to a 987, but 2nd gear is temperamental, it's never popped out can struggle to get in sometimes.  Not just when it's cold, cured by only changing upwards of 3.5k revs which is fine except for when it's warming up.  I also get some rattles on warm start up which I (and CPS) think are the  chain tensioners.  If I can get them replaced without too much cost I think it will be good for another 2 years which will take it north of 200k miles.  If the tensioners are an engine out job, I don't think I'll bother and then I'm not so confident.  I need to keep the running cots (excluding tyres) to under £1k a year really.

I think you really need to take each car individually.  If, and it's a big if, you exclude 2nd gear and tensioners on mine, then it's a better car than it was when I bought it at 40k miles. I mean everything else about it (including cosmetics), is better.

[Menoporsche]

You’ve done 76k in 3.5 years? Good stuff. 

[markSTI]

Dinny shoot the messenger lads

[PaulQ]

30 minutes ago, markSTI said:

Dinny shoot the messenger lads

Sorry, just found it rather amusing. 

[mvw]

14 hours ago, Menoporsche said:

You’ve done 76k in 3.5 years? Good stuff. 

125k miles in 5 years 8 months ?

[Bike Loon]

My 986S was on nearly 130,000 miles when I sold it, my current 987S is on 120,000 miles. Both with absolutely no issues, no oil usage , noises or anything like that. Think of it this way, they are big 6 cylinder engines that are 3.2 litre and 3.4 litre respectively and "only" produce 252bhp and 295bhp as Porsche like to build in reliability for the brand name.

A similar size BMW M3 engine runs over 340bhp ... this is partly why the Porsche ones run and run and run. Service them when they should be, do the oil and filter changes, warm the engine properly before giving it the beans and all is good.

[Mark Shead]

I have had two 986 both needed engine rebuilds at 65k both for diff reasons. 

 

Mark

[edc]

38 minutes ago, Mark Shead said:

I have had two 986 both needed engine rebuilds at 65k both for diff reasons. 

 

Mark

But you buy dead ones to start with ?